From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 15 19:14:03 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7021516A41C
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:14:03 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mkb@mkbuelow.net)
Received: from luzifer.incubus.de (incubus.de [80.237.207.83])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0325D43D45
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:14:02 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mkb@mkbuelow.net)
Received: from drjekyll.mkbuelow.net (p54AA8680.dip0.t-ipconnect.de
	[84.170.134.128])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by luzifer.incubus.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8472A323E4;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 21:16:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from drjekyll.mkbuelow.net (mkb@localhost.mkbuelow.net [127.0.0.1])
	by drjekyll.mkbuelow.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id
	j6FJED3x001860; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 21:14:14 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from mkb@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net)
Received: (from mkb@localhost)
	by drjekyll.mkbuelow.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j6FJEDk6001859;
	Fri, 15 Jul 2005 21:14:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mkb)
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 21:14:12 +0200
From: Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de>
To: Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20050715191412.GA1374@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net>
References: <42D6B117.5080302@plab.ku.dk>
	<20050714191449.A8A615D07@ptavv.es.net>
	<20050714195253.GA23666@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net>
	<20050715185413.GI37261@funkthat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050715185413.GI37261@funkthat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: 
Subject: Re: dangerous situation with shutdown process
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:14:03 -0000

John-Mark Gurney wrote:

>With non-written to sectors getting trashed with the cache enabled,
>barriers don't mean squat...

Of course if you pound the disk with a hammer, then barriers also
won't help. Just because with a few disks perhaps it won't work at
all doesn't mean that one shouldn't at least try and get it working
for perhaps the 90% where it would work in order to reduce the
possibility of corruption by as much as possible. I mean, anything
is better than the current situation where apparently nothing is
done at all.

Why am I arguing in an uphill battle here? Is data safety no longer
important to the FreeBSD community? Such issues should not even
have to be discussed at all!

mkb.